State Support for Peace Processes: A Multi-Country Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Launched by Ms Frances Adamson, Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade on 7 June 2017, State Support for Peace Processes: A Multi-Country Review was produced as part of the Australian International Conflict Resolution Project at the University of Melbourne and commissioned by the Development Policy Division of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.\n\nThe report explores how Canada, Malaysia, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States of America have approached supporting peace processes. It aims to identify concrete steps for Australia to consider in enhancing its approach to supporting peace and stability, including improving its capacity to support peace processes through whole of government approaches.\n\nThe report was prepared by researchers at the University of Melbourne led by Prof John Langmore, Dr Tania Miletic, Dr Aran Martin and Mr Nathan Shea, and includes chapters from experts around the world who have advised on the work of their countries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it